Ed Miliband

A lot of people in the centre and the left feel let down since the last general election. I vowed never to vote for Labour again after taking us into Iraq and voted Lib Dem in the last two general elections. However, they go and throw their hat in with the devil and we have this shower of ###### in charge mucking things up. I'm now finding myself going back to Labour because this country is steering to the right and it worries me, however Labour aren't exactly on the left these days.

I don't think people are waiting for a party like that, but it's clear that a lot of Labour supporters feel let down by the direction the party is taking. People aren't expecting a New Jerusalem but they at least want the Labour leadership to be challenging the Tory narrative and, more importantly, coming up with alternative strategies.

The least worst for UK government? Perhaps, fractionally, but only because the membership and support might just keep them in check, and might just steer the leadership away from such policies as the bedroom tax.

Of course, the leadership of a political party have to walk a thin line between keeping the party members happy and appealing to enough people who aren't party members to win elections.

And winning elections matters. National politics is an all or nothing game. You are in government, or you are one level above playing Sim City.

Yes, that's why a Labour Party constituency secretary wrote a letter of objection and complaint to Labour HQ about the cynical practice of the neighbouring constituency's election-candidate trying to interfere in the election of its own parliamentary candidate.

Steve, I'm sure you are a decent bloke but, when it comes to defending the Labour Party, you are the equivalent of Melanie-Phillips-discussing-Israel.

Steve, I'm sure you are a decent bloke but, when it comes to defending the Labour Party, you are the equivalent of Melanie-Phillips-discussing-Israel.

Harsh but probably fair...

My actual point was that the story as presented by Guido on his website doesn't quite match up to the reality of the rules of the Labour Party. He seems to be confusing the AGM, at which the constituency officers are appointed with a selection meeting, at which candidates are appointed. That business about lots of new members joining up has nothing to do with trying to fiddle the election for parliamentary candidate - you have to be a member for several months before you're allowed a vote in such matters. You cannot join one day and vote for your mate the next.

It's not really a political story, it's just tittle-tattle of almost no-consequence. Par for the course on that website.

A solid policy for Labour should be "Look at the state of the Tories. Go on... look at them! Frothy mouthed idiots, and that's the sensible sort, the rest give swivel-eyed loons the world over a bad name. Would you really trust them with your vote just so they can give even more tax cuts to the rich while their NHS policy is to dump you in a skip if you get too ill?"

What an article like that does is create more questions than answers. For example, if he accepts the Coalition spending plans but also wants to transfer more power to local government, is he going to reverse the cuts to councils? From 2010 to 2013 there have been 40% cuts in grants to councils on average and a further 10% cut to come by 2015 at the least. Councils can barely operate these days, never mind take on more responsibilities.

Come on Ed... give us something we can hang our hat on that's not waffle like this or trying to out-right the Tory right.

Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway

Of course they can. If they put country before party. I don't think any British government since Attlee has done that, which is partly why they are so despised.

Attlee (the greatest 20th century PM IMO) put country before party, and instituted earth shifting social change, lost his majority in the 1950 General Election and lost power a year later. Labour were not in government again for 13 years. The Tories took advantage of the years of austerity and reamained in power on the crest of the post war boom, whilst running with Attlee's changes. "Never having it so good" thanks to Attlee's post war policies.

"This is a very wealthy country, money is no object" D. Cameron February 2014

A solid policy for Labour should be "Look at the state of the Tories. Go on... look at them! Frothy mouthed idiots, and that's the sensible sort, the rest give swivel-eyed loons the world over a bad name. Would you really trust them with your vote just so they can give even more tax cuts to the rich while their NHS policy is to dump you in a skip if you get too ill?"

As someone who is probably going to vote Labour at the next GE I really hope Labour don't start negative campaigning. I want them to develop policies that are deliverable and unlike the other lot have the best interests of the country in mind rather than pointing out that the Tory's really are a crazy bunch.

A solid policy for Labour should be "Look at the state of the Tories. Go on... look at them! Frothy mouthed idiots, and that's the sensible sort, the rest give swivel-eyed loons the world over a bad name. Would you really trust them with your vote just so they can give even more tax cuts to the rich while their NHS policy is to dump you in a skip if you get too ill?"

What an article like that does is create more questions than answers. For example, if he accepts the Coalition spending plans but also wants to transfer more power to local government, is he going to reverse the cuts to councils? From 2010 to 2013 there have been 40% cuts in grants to councils on average and a further 10% cut to come by 2015 at the least. Councils can barely operate these days, never mind take on more responsibilities.

Come on Ed... give us something we can hang our hat on that's not waffle like this or trying to out-right the Tory right.

Councils can barely operate these days

That because too many of them ###### your money away on the wrong things.

I give you the arrogant. incompetent, undemocratic, secretive wasters at Cheshire East as just one example out of many. see http://www.creweguar...and_Lyme_Green/ for a heavily "redacted" version.

Attlee (the greatest 20th century PM IMO) put country before party, and instituted earth shifting social change, lost his majority in the 1950 General Election and lost power a year later. Labour were not in government again for 13 years. The Tories took advantage of the years of austerity and reamained in power on the crest of the post war boom, whilst running with Attlee's changes. "Never having it so good" thanks to Attlee's post war policies.

I am struck by the similarity with our great game. Fantastic game with awful P.R. vs Fantastic government with awful P.R.?

As a game, we deserve better. As a nation we deserve better. Hope we find it.

A solid policy for Labour should be "Look at the state of the Tories. Go on... look at them! Frothy mouthed idiots, and that's the sensible sort, the rest give swivel-eyed loons the world over a bad name. Would you really trust them with your vote just so they can give even more tax cuts to the rich while their NHS policy is to dump you in a skip if you get too ill?"

What an article like that does is create more questions than answers. For example, if he accepts the Coalition spending plans but also wants to transfer more power to local government, is he going to reverse the cuts to councils? From 2010 to 2013 there have been 40% cuts in grants to councils on average and a further 10% cut to come by 2015 at the least. Councils can barely operate these days, never mind take on more responsibilities.

Come on Ed... give us something we can hang our hat on that's not waffle like this or trying to out-right the Tory right.

Well, if he's going to 'decentralise' and give power to councils, he'll be giving them the ability to raise their own finances. Surely?

As someone who is probably going to vote Labour at the next GE I really hope Labour don't start negative campaigning. I want them to develop policies that are deliverable and unlike the other lot have the best interests of the country in mind rather than pointing out that the Tory's really are a crazy bunch.

So you're going to vote for something despite not knowing what their policies are? That, right there, is the problem with voters in the UK.

So you're going to vote for something despite not knowing what their policies are? That, right there, is the problem with voters in the UK.

That's true, many voters vote because their politics agree generally with the politics of the main political parties. Being a leftie I was a labour voter until the Iraq war where I switched to lib dem. I will never vote lib dem again after they enabled the Tories to take charge.

That's true, many voters vote because their politics agree generally with the politics of the main political parties. Being a leftie I was a labour voter until the Iraq war where I switched to lib dem. I will never vote lib dem again after they enabled the Tories to take charge.

So you're not voting for actual policies then. It's because you don't like the Tories.